Leader-Member Exchange Theory Leadership Leader-Member Exchange Theory Dr. Salma Chad

Path-Goal Theory of Leadership structuring and consideration Leader’s Actions: Focus on obstacle removal Become comfortable with both task and consideration behaviors Understand followers’ perception Effectiveness: Employee satisfaction and motivation Situational contingencies: Task structure Employee need for autonomy

Overview LMX Theory Description LMX Theory Perspective Early Studies Later Studies Phases in Leadership Making How Does the LMX Approach Work?

Definition Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory: conceptualizes leadership as a process that is centered on the interactions between a leader and subordinates Some theories focus on leaders: trait approach, skills approach and style approach Other theories focus on the follower and the context: situational leadership, contingency theory, and path-goal theory.

Dimensions of Leadership LMX theory makes the dyadic relationship between leaders and followers the focal point of the leadership process

LMX Theory Description Perspective Development - LMX theory first described by Dansereau, Graen, & Haga (1975), Graen & Cashman (1975), and Graen (1976) Revisions - Theory has undergone a number of revisions since its inception and continues to be of interest to researchers Assumption - LMX theory challenges the assumption that leaders treat followers in a collective way, as a group. LMX - Directed attention to the differences that might exist between the leader and each of his/her followers

Early Studies The Vertical Dyad Vertical Dyads First studies of LMX called – Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL) Focus on the vertical linkages leaders formed with each of their followers Leader’s relationship to a work unit viewed as a series of vertical dyads The Vertical Dyad Vertical Dyads

Early Studies Leader’s work unit as a whole was viewed as a series of vertical dyads; leader forms unique relationship with each subordinate

Early Studies, cont’d. Researchers found two general types of linkages (or relationships) – those based on: Expanded/negotiated role responsibilities (extra-roles) = in-group Relationships marked by mutual trust, respect, liking, and reciprocal influence Receive more information, influence, confidence, and concern than out-group members Formal employment contract (defined-roles) = out-group Relationships marked by formal communication based on job descriptions

Early Studies, cont’d. In-group/out-group status based on how well subordinate works with the leader and how well the leader works with the subordinate How subordinates involve themselves in expanding their role responsibilities with the leader determines whether they become in-group or out-group participants Becoming part of the in-group involves subordinate negotiations in performing activities beyond the formal job description

In-Group & Out-Group Subordinates more information, influence, confidence & concern from Leader more dependable, highly involved & communicative than out-group S S Out-Group In-Group S Leader S S S S S S S Out-Group less compatible with Leader usually just come to work, do their job & go home S S S Subordinate

Later Studies (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) Initial research primarily addressed differences between in-groups and out-groups; later research addressed how LMX theory was related to organizational effectiveness Later research focus on the quality of leader-member exchanges resulting in positive outcomes for: Leaders Followers Groups Organizations in general

Later Studies (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) Researchers found that high-quality leader-member exchanges resulted in: Less employee turnover More positive performance evaluations Higher frequency of promotions Greater organizational commitment More desirable work assignments Better job attitudes More attention and support from the leader Greater participation Faster career progress “Leadership Making”

Leadership Making (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) A prescriptive approach to leadership that emphasizes that a leader should develop high-quality exchanges with all of her or his subordinates, rather than just a few. Three phases of leadership making which develops over time: (a) stranger phase (b) acquaintance phase (c) mature partnership phase

Phases in Leadership Making Graen & Uhl-Bien (1995) Scripted One Way Low Quality Self

Leadership Making Graen & Uhl-Bien (1995) Phase 1 Stranger Interactions within the leader-subordinate dyad are generally rule bound Rely on contractual relationships Relate to each other within prescribed organizational roles Experience lower quality exchanges Motives of subordinate directed toward self-interest rather than good of the group

Leadership Making Graen & Uhl-Bien (1995) Phase 2 Acquaintance Begins with an “offer” by leader/subordinate for improved career-oriented social exchanges Testing period for both, assessing whether the subordinate is interested in taking on new roles leader is willing to provide new challenges Shift in dyad from formalized interactions to new ways of relating Quality of exchanges improve along with greater trust & respect Less focus on self-interest, more on goals of the group

Leadership Making Graen & Uhl-Bien (1995) Phase 3 Mature Partnership Marked by high-quality leader-member exchanges Experience high degree of mutual trust, respect, and obligation toward each other Tested relationship and found it dependable High degree of reciprocity between leaders and subordinates May depend on each other for favors and special assistance Highly developed patterns of relating that produce positive outcomes for both themselves & the organization Partnerships are transformational – moving beyond self-interest to accomplish greater good of the team & organization

How Does the LMX Theory Approach Work? Focus of LMX Theory Strengths Criticisms Application

How does LMX theory work? LMX theory works in two ways: it describes leadership and it prescribes leadership In both - the central concept is the dyadic relationship Descriptively: It suggests that it is important to recognize the existence of in-groups & out-groups within an organization Significant differences in how goals are accomplished using in-groups vs. out-groups Relevant differences in in-group vs. out-group behaviors

How does LMX theory work? Prescriptively: Best understood within the Leadership Making Model (Graen & Uhl-Bien) Leader forms special relationships with all subordinates Leader should offer each subordinate an opportunity for new roles/responsibilities Leader should nurture high-quality exchanges with all subordinates Rather than concentrating on differences, leader focuses on ways to build trust & respect with all subordinates – resulting in entire work group becoming an in-group

Strengths LMX theory validates our experience of how people within organizations relate to each other and the leader LMX theory is the only leadership approach that makes the dyadic relationship the centerpiece of the leadership process LMX theory directs our attention to the importance of communication in leadership Solid research foundation on how the practice of LMX theory is related to positive organizational outcomes

Criticisms Inadvertently supports the development of privileged groups in the workplace; appears unfair and discriminatory The basic theoretical ideas of LMX are not fully developed How are high-quality leader-member exchanges created? What are the means to achieve building trust, respect, and obligation? What are the guidelines? Because of various scales and levels of analysis, measurement of leader-member exchanges is being questioned

Application Applicable to all levels of management and different types of organizations Directs managers to assess their leadership from a relationship perspective Sensitizes managers to how in-groups and out-groups develop within their work unit Can be used to explain how individuals create leadership networks throughout an organization Can be applied in different types of organizations – volunteer, business, education and government settings